🔗 Share this article

Last year, actor Jude Law stated he had no concerns about backlash for playing the Russian leader in a new film. This production, however, could coincide too neatly with the carefully constructed version circulated by Russian state media that, domestically, it reads as a compliment rather than a challenge.

The Manufactured Strongman

Over a long period, the Kremlin and its entertainment industry have collaborated to craft a tailor-made persona of Putin. This figure is an infallible strategist devoid of flaws, a former spy reframed as a local 007 who always knows more than he reveals.

“Domestically, the manufactured Putin has long eclipsed the real one.”

Cinematic Reinforcement

One recent example is a TV series released last fall, directed by a pro-government filmmaker. Its main character is a fictional blue-eyed lieutenant colonel selected by fate to “save” the nation from disorder. While he is called a different name, the message is unmistakable: the hero must be a familiar security officer.

International depictions frequently result in buttressing this identical story rather than debunking it. A new film based on a bestselling satirical novel sets out to subvert the leader's mythology by presenting him not as a cause but as a consequence, moving the narrative weight to the political machinery surrounding him.

The Myth of the Reluctant Leader

On screen, the president is presented as having been picked by powerful oligarchs to stabilise the country because he is “young, athletic and a spy”. They visit him and practically plead him to take the top job. His response is that he would rather govern from the shadows, seeking enduring influence.

This narrative is a key piece of state propaganda: the cool, reluctant strategist shaped by destiny. Historically, none of this took place.

The Reality of the Casting Call

No one actually pleaded with him to accept the role. The presidency was effectively a casting call with many candidates. Central to this process stood an influential oligarch from the Yeltsin era who planned to control the state de facto.

• The shortlist included several politicians, including a reformer subsequently assassinated and a security service director.
• According to an expert who studied his rise, the future president simply fitted the necessary criteria: loyal, from the security services, and politically neutral.
• A businessman close to the process said the key criterion was manageability and faithfulness, not leadership.

“The goal wasn't a powerful leader, they needed someone malleable, someone who would obey orders.”

Building the 007 Persona

Experts agree that the notion of Putin as a powerful KGB spy was constructed retrospectively. Stories about his “recruitment work” in East Germany do not stand up to scrutiny. Fundamentally, he was an administrator and routine duties, a low-level clerk not involved with actual agent work.

Interestingly, the shift to framing him as a “spy” could partly have been inspired by Daniel Craig’s arrival as 007. His harder interpretation prompted Russian media and social media to make comparisons with Putin. Edited images swapping Craig’s face with Putin’s surfaced on city centers, fueling the growing tendency to frame him as a Russian 007.

A Propaganda Win?

Given the casting, an actor popular with viewers there, the Kremlin will not miss the opportunity to frame his casting as a small victory. The film's omission of public dissent, the political rivals, or prominent activists in the story, even though it includes the past decade, is a pleasant bonus for state propaganda.

In Russian cinema, the president is frequently an omnipotent figure who remains unseen directly. He is signaled through photographs or orders from on high. In this new film, he finally acquires a famous actor's visage—one that could unintentionally echo the very myths it might seek to examine.